logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.09.24 2018나13286
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the reasoning of the judgment is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment as to the argument that the defendant is emphasizing a new argument at the trial of the court of first instance to the following, thereby citing it as is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4

2. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion that the goods were added was the cause for the goods claim by the Plaintiff in this case (hereinafter “price for the goods of this case”) and the goods supplied to C rather than the Defendant.

In other words, the defendant merely received the fee from the plaintiff while arranging the transaction between the plaintiff and C, and is not the party to the transaction who is supplied with the goods to the plaintiff.

The current status of sales (the No. 2-2 and the Defendant refer to the current status of sales) that the Plaintiff fabricated and sent to the Defendant, and refer to the No. 3-2 (the current status of sales). The document is arranged as No. 2-2 (the current status of sales) in the documentary evidence list. The document does not indicate the price of the instant goods or the outstanding amount, which supports the Defendant’s assertion.

From May 28, 2015 to December 29, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied goods to D unions, etc. at the Defendant’s initiative, and received the price of goods from D, etc., and thereafter, paid the commission agreed to the Defendant, but did not pay 12,561,972 won by manipulating the sales status table (Evidence B-2).

In addition to the price of goods that the Plaintiff was paid, KRW 42,989,00 in addition to the price of goods that the Plaintiff was paid, KRW 42,989,00 in addition to the price of goods that the Plaintiff was paid, KRW 42,989,00 in total, KRW 1,582,680 on May 29, 2015, and KRW 3,760,80 on June 3, 2015.

The following facts can be acknowledged according to the purport of Gap's evidence and the whole arguments as to the parties to a transaction.

The Defendant recognized the establishment of Chapter 14 out of the acceptance certificates (Evidence A 15-38) of Chapter 24 concerning the supply of each of the goods as the cause of the price of the instant goods.

(The fourth day of the trial of the first instance). The plaintiff is the defendant (mutual E) in the supply of each of the goods as the reason for the price of the goods in this case.

arrow